header-logo header-logo

18 October 2007
Issue: 7293 / Categories: Legal News , E-disclosure
printer mail-detail

Lawyers unhappy on e-disclosure rules

News

There are widespread concerns among litigators about ambiguity in the e-disclosure rules, a new survey reveals.

The study by Ipsos Mori for KPMG Forensic, shows 48 of the 100 UK litigators asked believe that judges and masters are ill-equipped to make e-disclosure case management decisions and should be trained on the difficulties routinely faced in an e-disclosure exercise.
Sixty-eight per cent also support the establishment of an independent body of industry practitioners to promote best practice and training in dealing with the disclosure of electronic documents.

Guidelines on e-disclosure were introduced into the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) two years ago, yet only 17% of lawyers believe they have had a positive impact. Nearly half (43%) believe they have not and 56% believe they have made litigation more costly. The survey shows that 48% cases cost £500,000 or more, with 26% costing over £1m.

KPMG Forensic says costs could be reduced if the two sides  met earlier, as the CPR suggest. In fact, 39% say they had never met their opponent to discuss it and of those that had met, in 29% of cases it was not until, or after, the case management conference.

Paul Tombleson, head of forensic technology at KPMG Forensic, says: “E-disclosure can be immensely complex and costly, and litigators have called for renewed energy in agreeing clearer case management guidelines.”

Issue: 7293 / Categories: Legal News , E-disclosure
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll